An Interesting Take

Friday

Oct 4, 2013 at 6:15 PMOct 4, 2013 at 7:31 PM

Thank you, Rick, for running Michael Gerson’s column in today’s paper. Gerson was one of the few officials in the W Administration who I thought had his head attached to his neck rather than his posterior.

I think Gerson’s list of substantive problems in Obamacare is well-stated, especially the section on why Obamacare is not sustainable.

I think Gerson is wrong when he suggests that the Tea Party has no end game in mind. As I’ve noted here, the Tea Party is revolutionary in its identification, and revolutionary in its belief that chaos theory leads to new, stable realities. You need look no further than the choice of names for the group.

Curiously, many of Gerson’s points have strong support from Senate Democrats. We’ve discussed here that Obama has already signed seven partial repeals of Obamacare, and that 14 more had bipartisan support. Many of the points raised by Gerson are points shared by Senate Democrats, who Obama is also ignoring. Considering the wave of propaganda by Dione, Robinson and others in the MWDN of late, the column is a good read and goes a short modicum toward restoring the credibility of our illustrious flagship paper.

Rob Meltzer

Thank you, Rick, for running Michael Gerson’s column in today’s paper. Gerson was one of the few officials in the W Administration who I thought had his head attached to his neck rather than his posterior.

I think Gerson’s list of substantive problems in Obamacare is well-stated, especially the section on why Obamacare is not sustainable.

I think Gerson is wrong when he suggests that the Tea Party has no end game in mind. As I’ve noted here, the Tea Party is revolutionary in its identification, and revolutionary in its belief that chaos theory leads to new, stable realities. You need look no further than the choice of names for the group.

Curiously, many of Gerson’s points have strong support from Senate Democrats. We’ve discussed here that Obama has already signed seven partial repeals of Obamacare, and that 14 more had bipartisan support. Many of the points raised by Gerson are points shared by Senate Democrats, who Obama is also ignoring. Considering the wave of propaganda by Dione, Robinson and others in the MWDN of late, the column is a good read and goes a short modicum toward restoring the credibility of our illustrious flagship paper.